I use APU-1.4 exclusively and so far have not had any issues with
it doing what I expect or want, at least for its interaction with
httpd trunk... that's admittedly not a review, just a data
point.
Let me see what else I can do to get this going...
On Feb 10, 2011, at 1:13 PM, William A. Rowe Jr. wrote:
> On 2/10/2011 8:27 AM, Jim Jagielski wrote:
>> What's holding us up for a release of apu-1.4.0?
>
> There have been calls for API review, nobody answered them. I'd vote -1
> at this point in time to ship unreviewed API additions and have already
> pointed out function argument signature flaws that must be fixed. (Turns
> out apr_dbd was used as the 'model', but apr_dbd itself was flawed in
> that respect from its introduction, and should be corrected at 2.0).
> Also the apr_crypto_device_ctx should never be passed, it should become
> part of the apr_crypto_ctx structure itself. Stack bytes are much worse
> than heap bytes. And I haven't seen clear feedback of original critics
> that their concerns were answered in the most recent refactorings.
>
> Turning the question around, what are you waiting for from apu-1.4.0 and
> are you willing to add your review?
>